Sony a7R II versus a7 II: Eight key differences

Sony a7R II versus a7 II: Eight key differences

Sony's a7-series marked the debut of full-frame mirrorless, and Sony still dominates this market with its a7S II, a7 II and a7R II. Sony has developed a reputation for rapid development cycles, and since they all look basically the same, it can be hard to figure out the differences between its current a7-series offerings.

The higher resolution a7R II costs almost twice as much as the a7 II, and in this article we'll be explaining why. So join us, as we take a detailed look at the major differences between the Sony a7 II and the a7R II.

Well great and I bought the A7ii. What a bummer. I could have gotten more AF performance for the same price from Canon/Nikon. This is really frustrating. Sony has nothing to boast about if they aren't even capable of producing a low-end camera that can keep up with other DSLR's in that price sector. Of course, for 3000 bucks the A7rii is a no brainer but not everyone has that much money for a camera body. I'm a beginner and I should learn shooting first before getting a monster camera.

They say that both cameras can be used while charging (connected to USB).

I have the A7II and I am pretty sure that this is not possible. When I first got the camera I plugged it in and thought I could power it on and try it out while charging. This was NOT the case. After "googling" it i found sources that said that it was only possible with the A7RII.

I had gotten an external charger due to this. I would have loved to be able to shoot tethered AND charging in certain situations. As is I have any extra batteries I have charging while using the camera tethered for when I inevitably run out of juice. I currently have FW 3.10 installed. Perhaps this usage while charging changed in 3.20? Can anyone confirm that the A7II can indeed be used while charging?

I recently bought the A7ii and was shocked to find that charge while use is only available on the R. Not only that but also the auto iso minimum shutter speed option is something only the R does.. I understand Sony got to give you this little extra worth your money concerning the R being so much more expensive. But seriously just disabling feautures on the normal A7 which still costs like 1800 bucks just to make the R look better is ridicilous. I mean for 1800 bucks not having minimum shutter speed is ridicilous. Hell even my 500 euro costing Nikon D5300 got that...

I know for a fact that I can get an external USB battery to power an A7Rii and an RX10 mk2, but unfortunately when I plugged in the A7ii into my HOUSE SB power bank (Anker) it just says USB connecting...

You may be able to slide by with sloppy technique in the soggy low-contrast conditions of the Pacific Northwest and in the perpetual gloom of England, but in the rest of the world it's still very easy to blow out highlights regardless of sensor.I shoot four to five days a week with a D810 and find that I still frequently need graduated ND filters, silks, reflectors, and fill flash to get acceptable professional results.

You pay for extra features and resolution, including features not listed in the "8". The A7Rii is no more expensive than the A7R or A7S when they were first introduced, but you get more for your money.

Richard, Rishi --- One really helpful approach might be to identify a few common use profiles...eg. It's arguable to me that the A7rII is at least on a par with the best available cameras on today's market for IQ, especially in challenging light conditions. This is made especially true by a unique combination of technologies: high megapixels, IBIS, BSI, great but not super quick focus and some really good prime lenses. If money is an issue, the A7II gets you a long way in this direction for a lot less. Especially the IBIS makes many excellent, not too expensive primes available for tack sharp 24mp shooting. Both cameras are sturdy and reliable. The available E and FE zooms, except the 70-200 zooms, are a clear step down in sharpness and general IQ. But if you want their convenience, the A7II, will produce equivalent IQ to the A7rII. If you want fast dead on focus, or a camera to shoot many hundreds of shots per day, there are better choices.

Auto focus is fast enough for the A7ii and A7Rii with most lenses, even in dim light. Where it falls down is in focus tracking. The Sony 90/2.8 Macro is slow, possibly due to a long throw and range. The Batis 85/1.8 was said to be slow, but I don't find it so. These cameras have an interesting option, DMF. Once you get AF lock, turning the focus ring places the lens in manual mode, with (optional) 5x/12x magnification.

I currently have the A6000 + Zeiss 24, Zeiss 55 and FE90. I'm thinking of ditching the Zeiss 24 and buying a A7II + 28f2 instead. This would enable me to have a trio combo with a slightly wider angle lens than the 24 on A6000, stabilisation and FF (increased sharpness, better DOF, better ISO). To me, no matter how good the A7RII is, I'm happy Sony has released the cheaper (and yet expensive) A7II.

What you have is an incredible combination. I have the A6000 and each of the lenses you mention. If stabilization is needed, you can get the stabilized 50mm 1.8 emount which is also quite good, for $300. At 24 mp, the IBIS is not as necessary as it is at 42mp. The 90 fe is all ready stabilized, and is actually giving you about a 135mm equivalent on the A6000, but will not on the A7, so you are actually losing pretty valuable extra range. The 24 is a great lens, and shooting that wide, stabilization is just not nearly as critical. The a7II does have about a stop more dynamic range, but not that important. I actually shoot much more often with my a6000 than I do with my 7rII. Based on my experience I think the upgrade would be marginal at best, and my personal advice would be to spend your money on more lenses, and wait for a more meaningful upgrade.

IBIS still makes a significant difference at 24MP, depending on your needs or habits. I ditched my A6000 for the A7 and never looked back, myself. IBIS just sealed that deal for me. Remember, it applies to OSS lenses (compliments the lens based stabilizing) as well as legacy/non-stabilized ones.

I agree with sensibill. If you are a good light shooter then Average User is correct. However I find that in dimmer lighting where you might want to keep your ISO as low as possible and end up with a shutter speed of 1/10 or even 1/5 a wide angle lens will still benefit form IBIS. Or do you guys disagree?

Sony has an incredible 6 models in the A7 line, which creates a fair degree of marketing confusion, but really only needs one better rounded, well developed product. Sony needs to use a larger capacity batter, fix the menus, at dual SD card slots and get the ergonomics right. How about one well rounded camera body rather than a half dozen overlapping and increasingly expensive models? In short, we need an A7 III with a lower resolution version of the BSI sensor so we can have better high ISO performance and more reasonably sized RAW file for the sake of workflow. In short, Sony needs to consolidate the A7 line to just one do-it-all model per generation.

The A7ii is the lower priced version of the A7Rii. At 24 MP, the A7ii still tops most of the Nikon and Canon cameras, including their flagship models. This is standard marketing practice, and has been around since the animals walked off the ark.

The A7S and A7Sii are optimized for HD video. Even at $3K, the A7Sii is half the price of a dedicated Super-32 video camera (which takes the same lenses). The impressive high-ISO capability is a pleasant bonus of the lower resolution, larger cell sensor.

Looking back I consider A6000 as the first solid Sony mirrorless camera, and 6300 is a worthy improvement. The first solid A7 camera is the A7RII, at a definitely high price. A7SII is a pricey video camera (rigged up). Hopefully the next generation will be a really solid offer. Sony PR machine invested huge amounts to establish their mirrorless concept as a religion, and it worked for some, but tapering off with others. There are many good cameras now, and willingness to buy getting less robust. I expect less camera launches at high price points.

There's no confusion between the Sony models, except perhaps to camera newbies. A7S series for street/night/video, A7R series for maximum resolution and IQ for architecture and cropping, A7 series for entry level at a markedly lower price than its siblings.

Sony doesn't 'need' one camera for the A7 line. Choice is good. I'm sure lossless compressed RAW will come soon and the A7RII is priced about $500 more than it should be, but none of that calls for rolling all these models into one (silly). And there aren't six product lines, just three. Nobody refers to the other 'Mark XX' iterations as different product lines and Canon, Nikon, etc. seem to do fine with many more models to choose from in their lineup.

Like everyone else said here... the A7II is the budget version of the A7RII. However I do in part agree with you.

The first round of A7's came out all with the same body and just difference regarding resolution (the S of course only has CDAF). I believe that sony should have an did intend to continue with the trend. However... technology development is what it is. I believe that if they did have it ready, stable, and at a good value the A7II would have had a BSI sensor. But since it did not they brought it out in their R release instead. If I am correct in this assumption the next release of the III will incorporate BSI in all of them. However, once again since the R and S tend to come out at a later date, then they might have something else that the base would be missing.

Curious timing, the the a7RII has been out for over a year, and the a7II over a year and a half.

If money was no object, I don't know what I'd buy - an a7RII, D810, or D750, with whatever lenses I fancy. I love the continuous eye-AF on the a6300 I rented, but the native long-glass Sony hasn't even put on the road map is a key for me for Nikon.

But the good news is there are four players in FF. I love competition!

DSLRs have the edge if you need fast AF tracking and long battery life. Long lenses are a separate issue. There is no size advantage to long lenses designed for mirrorless cameras, and both Nikon and Canon lenses can be used on the Sony with AF and aperture control, as well as A-mount lenses inherited from Minolta.

I haven't seen any Nikon lenses which will do justice to the D810 sensor, whereas the A7Rii has over a dozen up to the job.

First time I read that electronic shutter can induce noise. I know the other disadvantages (rolling shutter, possibly less bits) but noise? Why would that be? Is that why I get noisy skies with my Pana GX7?

There is a measurable loss in ISO and S/N when the EFS is used, but the effect is strictly academic. The advantage of shock-free (or silent) operation greatly outweighs using the double-=clack shutter mode.

The rolling shutter effect is only noticeable in certain subjects, like sickle-shaped helicopter blades. It can get pretty obvious if the camera is moving (i.e., bouncing) if the photographer is running, skiing or on a bicycle. It's negligible even from a moving automobile.

Ed, Zeiss and Voigtlander don't play in the same field as Canon, Nikon, Sigma and Tamron. Claiming Sony has lenses is marketing hyperbole. Yes, you can mount 3rd party lenses via an adapter, but the moment these have their FW tweaks, you're at the mercy of your adapter-maker, if it is still in business.

Sony has done awesomely well. It is quite possibly the best mirror-less camera out there if you're after tech.

I'd love to see more Sony apsc e-mount lenses for sure (and apparently more are coming), but I think it would be inaccurate to say that it's the worst when compared to other mirorrless systems. As far as I'm concerned, it has all the key prime lenses (albeit some are quite expensive), and has a number of AF lenses from third party - something that Fujifilm doesn't have (but MFT do). When we consider the fact that all Sony ff e-mount lenses are also compatible with apsc bodies, I think it's misleading to say that e-mount aspec lens lineup is lacking. What would be fair to say is Sony apsc lineup lacks good quality zoom lenses.

I think by "support" we're talking about a native E mount for the lens. There are at least 20 such lenses under the Sony or Zeiss label, many of which are world class. Voigtlander, Samyang and others are on board too.

Sony, Nikon and Canon all have APS-C or similar cameras, yet none have an exciting lineup of lenses dedicated to these smaller sensors. The Sony/Zeiss 16-35/4 zoom lens serves nicely as a "normal" zoom on an APS-C camera. It's not cheap, but it does have exceptional build and optical quality, and is reasonably sized.

Sony's gap has been a good, "normal" zoom for full frame, and f/2.8 "professional" zooms. That changed when the G-Master 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 lenses were introduced this Spring. As expected, they are large, heavy and expensive.

How about AF illumination from flashes? In pure blackness you can focus (almost instantly), capture a perfectly exposed picture with a canon (or nikon). I truly wish that I could with my A7II. I would rather have that first than sigma or tamron lenses. With the lenses I have at least I can still capture images, with out the AF assist lamps I have to resort to manual focus with zoom to focus and shoot... in some very dim situations the moment is gone before you even get close to in focus, or your subject has moved out of your zoomed in framing.

NOQUARTER72388: I'm not sure which "crappy lenses" you have in mind. There are certainly some extremely good lenses with a native FE mount, and not all of them expensive (e.g., the 28/2), but please feel free to shop around for something that suits your needs and attitude.

Sheesh! The sony fanboys really came out of the woodwork on this one. "Internet trolls are people who fish for other people's confidence, and once found, exploit it." Huh?? A troll is not a con artist ya dork. And you're the one trying to label me as a troll? My comment was a tongue-in-cheek jab at Sony, and yes its STILL true when it comes to native lenses. And even with that in mind, I'm still considering buying an a7ii, especially if they drop a little in price after photokina. Humor is apparently outlawed around here...SERIOUS BUSINEZZ guys.

Thanks for the comparison, it did help me. Yes I could have googled the differences myself but nice easy consumer info like this is good. I suggest that you also clear out the differences between the RX100 mk 1->4 since they all are on sale still and the same for the different RX10s and Canons different 5D models and so on. Also the differences between other cameras, like all Canons different APS-C models, Nikons different fullframe offerings etc. Well, you get the picture.

There used to be a time when we had to buy expensive magazines to keep up with the newest reviews. Now these reviews are free on sites like Dpreview. If Dpreview does indeed receive some extra 'advertising money' for posting articles like this one, then so they should. If amateurs like me don't need to go out and pay for overpriced magazines any more which were, by the way jam-packed with advertising, then you won't hear me complain.

The post is not, in any way, supported or paid for by any manufacturer. It's merely an article format we're experimenting with.

We often see 'Which camera should I buy' threads on the forum and so wanted to see if we could help shed some light on specific choices. We did Fujifilm X-T2 vs X-Pro2 a couple of weeks back, a7 II vs a7R II this week and we have various other combinations (not always from the same brand) that we're working on.

Sorry if you're not finding them useful, but they are in response to what we thought was a reader demand, not any concerns about marketing or sales on the part of camera makers.

I remember when all the info I needed was found in my 3 favourite mags: Popular Photography, B&W magazine and Photo District News. probably half of the pages were ads and don't remember me complaining.

Call it foolish nostalgia, but I did enjoy the building excitement waiting for the next issue of PopPhoto to hit my mailbox, just like waiting for that package of prints to return to my local photo shop. I still enjoy having real pages in my hands and I remember reading the entire magazine, adverts and all.

I disagree. I used to enjoy reading those paper magazines, enjoying some quality time on my porcelain throne. Now with all that digital content on those ever shrinking gadget devices, it's a health hazard in the making.

Last week I wanted to go purchase an A7RII or possible the RX1R MKII. To my suprise, the Sony online store is CLOSED and seems that they have closed many retail stores. Either, camera has been hard to find in a store.

Just use DPreview owner, Amazon or one of the NY houses or better yet a local camera store. Sony closed their retail outlets quite a while ago and this has nothing to do with the -45% that the earthquake dealt the the company.

Which rock have you been living under? That happened a full year ago. (That you didn't notice pretty explains why they closed them, too. Geez, I mean you don't see people complaining they can't buy Nikon at the Nikon Store, Canon at the Canon Store, Pentax at the Ricoh Store...)

@Greenville Canon's consumer camera division is a minority of the company. While I doubt Sony would buy Canon's consumer camera division, they could probably afford it if the sale was desired by both parties. Only 36% of Canon's revenue is from the "Consumer Business Unit" which covers not just DSLRS, but inkjet printers, broadcasting equipment, digital production equipment, large format printers, scanners, video camcorders ,etc).

Right, you can't buy Sony A7 cameras anywhere. They're quickly being phased out and aren't easily obtainable online or at Best Buy in the USA. Same with A6000, A6300, A5100, RX1, RX10, RX100 series. All discontinued and dead.

Yup. And Sony closed their online store and a random Sonybaiter saying 'sales down 43%!' most assuredly spells doom for Sony and their cameras.

@sensibill A7, A7R, A7S and A6300 are abundant in the stores here in UK.

@All about the online stores or not; the point is buying Sony is risky business. Will support be available in a few years? Will parts exist? Have they used good materials? If you feel comfortable purchasing a product from Sony that's fine with me. But you will not catch me buying Sony product anytime soon.

By the way I prefer stores at least I can see and touch the product before I buy it.

@Nick932 what's wrong with Sony? I remember their hi-fi products from back when I was a little kid. subjectively, it feels like Sony's going to be around forever. as for whether they use good materials, I'd say it's their design that has more problems, their materials are fine by me. also their lenses like 24-70/4 have very good materials but not so good design optically (plus they suck in dust).

So now that you have been presented with evidence, you are going to post your own image and declare victory? DPR tested shutter and mirror vibrations extensively as the link I posted above shows. It's not something they just made up this week. Read D810 review.

The Nikon D810 has an electronic first shutter (EFS), but it can only be used with the mirror locked up. The Sony A7ii and A7Rii can use EFS 100% of the time, even in continuous shooting mode. With EFS, there is NO shutter shock. The A7R has a shutter shock problem which has been widely documented.

Sony cameras shift to 12 bit mode in a few operating modes, including silent (fully electronic) shutter mode. I'm not sure it makes a noticeable difference in image quality, but it happens and is avoidable.

There are no speed limits on using the electronic first shutter. You may get a rolling shutter effect or ghosting with certain moving objects. This is a CMOS characteristic, not specifically a Sony issue. In nearly two years using EFS or silent mode exclusively, I have never seen any artifacts nor encountered any other problems.

If the camera is set to take uncompressed RAW images, they are 14 bit except...- Continuous shutter (normal or EFS)- Silent Shutter- Long exposure NR is ON- Bulb

Rishi - agreed. I am making the point that it is not an issue but when tested for what shock there is 1/80th is right in the middle of the range where some shock is observable. I've actually felt the A7r shutter with my feet when standing on a hardwood floor and the camera is on a tripod.

Most likely reason is production quantities of the BSI sensor, in any resolution, is extremely limited right now so Sony is making the highest resolution it can and selling it in the most expensive camera it can to maximize profits.

When they can make more, you'll see other Sony cameras, as well as Nikon etc, start using them.

Thanks for making this comparison available. I am on the fence getting one of the Sony A7X bodies (am a Canon shooter since many years). I didn't really get the differences between the models except the obvious difference in resolution and price.

I'll wait for Photokina and see if new models will be announced and whether it's worth for me to wait a bit longer.

They are still selling good numbers of 5DmkIIIs, so from a business point of view (and remembering one of Canon's five ninja skills is making money selling cameras+lenses, which they do way way better than anybody else) I think it's about the optimum time to replace it.

This feature is already there in the A7RII with the first 5 options in the Auto ISO min SS. setting. You can select slower, slow, standard, fast and faster, respectively being shutter speeds of 2 and 1 stops slower than FL, equal to FL, 1 and 2 stops faster than FL. So for a 50mm lens this would mean speeds of around 1/10, 1/25, 1/50, 1/100 and 1/200. Of course this changes with the lens you attach.

@Seeky I just tried it with my A7RII and a 35mm Loxia and it doesn't work.Standard is 1/60, Slow is 1/30, Slower is 1/15...Fast is 1/125, Faster is 1/250.Even if it worked, 1 stops difference is a lot, 0.5 would be better !

@Lucas_ This is what I do in dark environments, but when it's bright you become suddenly overexposed, and you have to switch to aperture mode, where the speed will be adjusted automatically.

In lots of scenarios, motion blur can also be important. With 1/60 taking a photo of a person posing in front of the camera should not show any motion blur. Maybe they chose 1/60 as "minimum" for the A7 series for "usual" applications and added the extra stops settings in the A7r2

How does it work with a longer lens on the A7r2?On my A7II (which does not have the shutter speed setting) with my Batis 85 the camera won't go below 1/100 shutter speed in A mode until it hits the ISO limit. With the 35mm FE it won't go below 1/60..

@ Anadrol Can you try it with a Sony lens? I'm surprised since the Loxia lenses pass lens data to the camera for stabilization and exif. The camera seems to default to the standard which is indeed 1/60.

Auto ISO with my A7II is really a shame for a camera at this price point. Owning Nikons D700 for 7 years, a P900 and some Samsung NXes, I know there are better implementations in cameras for a long time. That Sony didn't fixed it in the last fw update was a real disappointment. If Sony thinks, that I will buy an A7RII because of this, they are wrong. Ok, it doesn't matter for Sony, they already have my money and I even paid the early adopter fee...

I bought the 7RII as I like to shoot long exposure landscapes and have an excellent image quality and an light system for hiking. Image quality is superb, but I was not satisfied by Service and heat problems at filming and taking long exposure shots. After two videos of about 20 minutes the body got overheated, and had an permanent shutdown. Service time 12 weeks!!! and an bill of €700. That is not acceptable. Not for this price of the camera.Sony has to improve the AF performance too. It is nearly impossinbleto get sharp shots of my children and pets.

Sensor are being developed on computers - The blueprints can be stored anywhere. Manufacturing can also be done somewhere where they have the right wafermachines. This doesn't necessarily take place in Japan. Could be China, Taiwan, Thailand, The US, Germany.

Many already announced cameras have been delayed because of the quake damage. Sensors cannot be ordered ala-carte at any factory anywhere. And to release a new model, you need to create some stock or risk p***d off would-be customer like Zeiss likes to do. You are over-simplifying the process of making a sensor (Sony produces a few different design and so do their other customers, this stuff is complex).

A better comparison is how the D750 and D810 just dominate both these wannabe DSLRs and their overpriced Zeiss lenses. Get either Nikon DSLR bodies and your choice of Nikon glass (or awesome value Sigma Art lenses) and call it a day. Try again Sony!

For some camera buyers it is of great psychological importance that their camera "dominates" or "destroys" all other cameras, otherwise they seem to lack all confidence in their ability to take a good image. So far I though that only Canon users were affected by this behavior, but you seem to be the exception to the rule.

Given the number of idiotic comments here (and on most DPR articles), it would be great if you had a comment rating system (like Ars Technica, for example) where comments can be voted down as well as up, and are automatically hidden if enough people downvote them.

Absolutely seconded! DPR could very well use a downvote option too, to give a higher priority to well-reasoned, articulate comments. But I disagree on the censorship part, unless a comment is reported and deleted.

Kharan, at Ars Technica at least, the downvoted comments aren't removed entirely, they're just hidden (collapsed) with a note saying they've been hidden due to downvoting. You can still click to view the hidden comment, and you can still quote it to make a reply. It's a great compromise that hides most of the idiocy.

Yes, I frequent other forums that have the same system, but I simply disagree with it. I feel that it only draws more attention to them, as now you've to click, and it feels like censorship. I'd rather just have them moved to the bottom of the page.

For Sony it's time to admit that A7II is not competitive at the present price point of $1700. A7II has nothing to offer when compared to Nikon D750, Pentax K-1 or even Canon 6D. The price of A7II should be lowered to the level of A6300 ($1200-$1300) as it could be an entry point to FF domain, and thus a real FF alternative for A6300, and also opening up a new FF price band (where 6D and D610 should be actually).

The three DSLR examples you mention are actually at a lower level than the Sony A7II ( maybe the closest is the Pentax... ). Anyway, they still use prism viewfinders, slapping mirrors, bulky bodies, fake live view, etc...!

The 2014 Sony A7 that I have is losing value every day, you can find examples in mint condition for almost the same money you can get a 2005 Canon 5D (in the same mint condition), you are talking 600USD. I wanted to trade my A7 for a 6D but considering the Canon retains its value way better than Sony I won't se that happen.

A Sony A7ii has nothing to offer compared to a Nikon D750? How about...- In-body Image Stabilization (IBIS) with any lens- Shockless electronic first shutter (EFS)- Can use nearly any lens with an adapter, including Nikon- Small footprint, about the same as a Leica M- Full time Live View, not just with the mirror up, on a tripod.- Built-in WiFi for image transfer and remote control- Precise manual focusing, with 5x or 12x magnification

24 MP should not be dismissed lightly. That's as much resolution as the late, lamented Nikon film scanners. I wouldn't trade my A7Rii for the A7ii, but I'm more than happy to keep one as an hot backup.

Great comparison... Off topic but Sony related.. The a6300 just got a firmware update that is suppose to solve over heating in 4k.. I don't think its a rummer, wonder why DP review hasn't posted it.. Can anyone validate...

As long as it isn't officially announced it IS a rumour.Next to that firmware can take a long time to test especially if its a fix for overheating issues one wants to be sure the 'new' firmware doesn't harm the camera and its internals.

I don't think Sony wants to have lots of people complaining about the new firmware still frying their cameras.

I have no idea that these cameras with USB charging can charge while using it. If that is the case, one can shoot endlessly for a day using those battery banks for smartphones. USB charging and poor battery life is not a problem anymore, it seems!

One more hardware that Sony can add now, as an electronics and smartphone company, is to include built-in memory. It is convenient for those who doesn't need large storage and performs much faster than external cards.

@ CekariYH It does charge and shoot simultaneously with a battery via USB; the case you take from the manual is when it is charging via wall outlet, in that case you can't charge and shoot simultaneously. It is in the last sentence under notes.

The link I supplied from the manual does not say in the Notes that it will charge with a Power Bank (mobile charger) while in use.Last sentanke under Notes: "When using a mobile charger as a power source, confirm that it is fully charged before use. Also, be careful of the remaining power on the mobile charger during use." I have tried, I have two 20 000mAh Power Banks, both with one 1.5mAh outlet and one 2.4mAh outlet each and none of them charges while in use, sorry to say.

Sorry, I made a mistake in my previous post. I didn't mean to say it charges the camera via usb power bank, but it powers it. In the end, it doesn't really matter. Whether a power bank charges battery > battery powers camera OR a power bank > powers camera, the result is the same, the latter method is likely more efficient. The only difference is that you can't charge the battery, remove USB power bank and then shoot, you need to maintain connection of USB power bank with camera at all times.

You can charge the battery in both an A7ii and A7Rii using an external USB power pack when the camera is turned OFF. The A7Rii has an USB mode in the menu which will allow you to run with an USB power supply if there is an internal battery in place and charged. The A7ii will only use the USB port for data or remote operation when the camera is on.

People who exchange their APS-C for Full Frame have fallen for marketing.

The little decrease in DOF doesn't all of sudden change your style of photography, or make you a talented photographer. Not to say - that Sony would love you to sell you the more expensive lenses adding a lot of weight to your system.

The Zeiss Loxia and Batis lenses, as well as the Sony G lenses will deliver pixel sharpness with the 42 MP sensor, provided you use a tripod, turn IBIS off and use a cable release. While not inexpensive, these lenses are priced competitively with those from Nikon and Canon. The Sony G Master lenses are designed to accommodate the next generation of high resolution sensors. I have the 24-70/2.8 GM, which is as sharp throughout its range as any of the existing primes it covers.

@Ed - There is more to a lens than sharpness: Distortion, color rendition, etc. Sharpness is overrated, especially with regards to printed output. It is also subjective and limited by how much the eye can see. I never buy a lens based only on sharpness.I would venture to say that most pros still shoot with primes to minimize the above lens faults.

Since distortion is so easily corrected in firmware, lenses designed for Sony aren't optimized in this regard. In general, the uncorrected distortion is about 1%, but less than 0.25% after correction. Special attention is paid to correcting CA and other aberrations, flat field and bokeh, which are not so easily corrected afterwards.

I like primes because they are smaller, lighter, faster and less obtrusive than zoom lenses. However if you add up the weight and cost , a 24-70/2.8 Sony GM zoom lens is about 50% cheaper and lighter than the prime lenses it overlaps.

I know. Overnight, move all the Canon users over to a separate website and cut access off to them here. Call it DCR if you like. I'd be embarrassed and calling out my fellow users if I was a Canon shooter. It's appalling and I don't like coming here anymore. People have no manners left and lie continually. Hell will take care of them.

What does the statement below mean? What are the exact things A7R2 does better with adapted lenses? I know one - A7R2 AF with green mode on Metabones covers most of the sensor where A7m2 is more like DSLR that has AF points in the central third.

"more complete support for third-party lenses"

PS One more difference adapting Leica lenses works better on A7r2 i.e. less color shift and vignetting.

Because the sensitive parts are close to the surface, there is less color shift and vignetting with a BIS sensor. However the same 2 mm cover glass is used, which distorts the image of short focus lenses not designed with that in mind.

The A7Rii has 399 AF sensing points in the sensor itself, covering about 90% of the area. A Nikon D3 (and D5) has about 25% coverage.

Eric that's funny. Recently i had a thread where i was sharing a few portraits, one was of my daughter. A member who shoots ML (and is very vocal about the benefits of eye AF) insisted that my shot was flawed due to being ever so slightly focused in front of her near eye, on the lashes and brow. She insisted that eye AF would have prevented such a problem.

In reality the shot was so close to the eyeball it was very hard to notice especially when viewing the full shot. I didn't mention that i was using S-AF and slight movement before the shutter press was the culprit, it wouldn't have made a difference to the person.

If i had only known eye AF only gets "close enough", i could have used that as a retort. At least i don't feel so bad now about my shot.

Note that Rishi and I refer to the same eye (the girl's right, or the left from the viewers perspective. a quick look at the lashes will show that the eye is in focus. The depth of field is so narrow in this shot that you can't get the entire eye in focus, due to the head-angle (and certainly not both). Get your eyes checked if you can't see this.

"I think" BSI tech is not that useful (when it comes to image quality) in larger sensors because the electronics that are moved to back do not cover very large area. In smaller sensors they make more sense to me.But then I may be wrong...

Yes you are wrong. For example when you use adapted lenses from Leica the light incidence angle in the corners is not perpendicular so the electronics in front do mess up the image quality - color shift, vignetting etc.

Also A7R2 is amazingly clean at high iso like 6400. On A7m2 it is barely usable.

I use my A7Rii regularly at ISO 25600 with publishable results. The A7ii is noisier at half that value. In lighting that calls for that ISO, you can't read the lettering on the control dials. Noise tends to affect entire pixels. At 42 MP, noise is extremely fine grained in addition to being relatively low level.

Diminishing returns with larger sensors, yes. But it's also partly what allows the a7R II to catch up to a D5 or 1D X II, negating the notion that you have to sacrifice resolution for noise performance.

Also, yes, more steep incoming angles can be accommodated because of the shallower effective pixel depth.

"In the good old days, it was generally believed that the more pixels you packed onto a sensor, the noisier the images you'd get out the other end. These days of course we're much more enlightened..."I think this axiom still holds.Use the same BSI technology but with smaller/more pixels (i.e. 84MP) and you will see the image deteriorating. And lets ignore the unreal conditions required to get that much resolution in the real world.In the end is not really about more or less pixels but how much percentage of the sensor area is sensitive to light (aka Fill Factor) and that is why the A7R II manages to pull it.But is more about finding the right balance or sweet spot when it comes to resolution and the A7R II pays the price in performance.

Because the A7rII is painfully slow when writing images to the card and it is painfully expensive especially for people who do not produce 5 foot prints every day. I think I am not the only one watching out for an affordable A7III which packs 24MP but most of the other benefits of the A7rII. It is just a pity that the A7II provides the old sensor, old AF module and no full electronic shutter. Well, if Sony is at it please add a touchscreen or joystick or better both and please have the cameras switch on fast.

More about gear in this article

In this article, we'll be directly comparing the Sony a9 and a7R II, looking in detail at exactly where their differences lie. For some photographers, the a9 might meet their needs admirably, whereas for others, the older a7R II might be just as good - or better. Read more

The latest project from the ever-adventurous Benjamin Von Wong puts a colorfully costumed model-turned-mermaid in a sea of plastic bottles. He hopes to encourage others to reduce plastic use. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

The Edelkrone DollyONE is an app-controlled, motorized flat surface camera dolly. The FlexTILT Head 2 is a lightweight head that extends, tilts and pans. They aren't cheap, but when combined these two products provide easy camera mounting, re-positioning and movement either for video work or time lapse photography.

Are you searching for the best image quality in the smallest package? Well, the GR III has a modern 24MP APS-C sensor paired with an incredibly sharp lens and fits into a shirt pocket. But it's not without its caveats, so read our full review to get the low-down on Ricoh's powerful new compact.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1X is the ultimate sports, action and wildlife camera for professional Micro Four Thirds users. However, it can't quite match the level of AF reliability offered by its full frame competitors.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

We've updated our waterproof camera buying guide with the latest round of rugged compacts, and we've crowned a new winner as the best pick in the category: the Olympus TG-6. That is, unless you happen to find a good deal on the TG-5.

Researchers with the Samsung AI Center in Moscow and the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology have created a system that transforms still images into talking portraits with as little as a single image.

K&R Photographics, a camera store in Crescent Springs, Kentucky, was robbed by armed men, who not only took thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment, but also injured the 70-year-old co-owner of the store.

The new Fujifilm GFX 100 boasts some impressive specifications, including 100MP, in-body stabilization and 4K video. But what's it like to shoot with? Senior Editor Barnaby Britton found out on a recent trip to Florence, Italy.

It's here! The long-awaited next-generation Fujifilm GFX has been officially launched. Click through to learn more about the camera that Fujifilm is hoping will shake up the pro photography market - the GFX100.

We've known about the Fujifilm GFX 100 since last fall, but now it's official: this 102MP medium-format monster will be available at the end of June for $10,000. In addition to its incredible resolution, the camera also has in-body IS, a hybrid AF system, 4K video and a removable EVF.

According to DJI, any drone model weighing over 250 grams will have AirSense Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers installed to help drone operators know when planes and helicopters are nearby.

Chris and Jordan are kicking off a new segment in which they make feature suggestions to manufacturers for the benefit of all photographer-kind. To start things off, they take a look at the humble USB-C port and everything it could be doing for us.

The Olympus TG-5 is one of our favorite waterproof cameras, and the company today introduced the TG-6, a relatively low-key update. New features include the addition of an anti-reflective coating on the sensor, a higher-res LCD, and more underwater and macro modes.

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

We've been playing around with a prototype of the new Peak Design Travel Tripod and are impressed so far: it's incredibly compact, fast to deploy and stable enough for the heaviest bodies. However, the price may turn some away.